It is good to see that even conservatives like him feel the need to underscore their commitment to equal rights. But in the end, it's a phony attempt to have it both ways.

There are plenty of documented cases of discrimination under the civil unions law, in hospitals, in insurance markets, and in workplaces. But even if you could magically eliminate them, it is still an insult to deny these couples entry into the club of marriage. It sends the message that their unions are something less than traditional heterosexual unions, something separate and different.

Ask yourself this: What if the Supreme Court in 1967 had denied full marriage rights for interracial couples, but said they could join in civil unions with all the same legal protections? The court didn't do that - it simply granted equal rights to interracial couples. And if it had established a second tier, people would ask why the separate category was needed at all.

We have the same question today for the governor: Why are gays not entitled to join the club?

This is likely about politics. Christie has national ambitions, and signing this bill would severely diminish his standing in the Republican Party, and probably kill his chances of reaching the White House. The veto will protect his career, but at the expense of gay citizens of this state.

If the governor really wanted to ensure equal rights to gays, he could have signed the bill. It's that simple. His refusal to do so is not a surprise. But it is a disappointment.